2026:JHHC:2836 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(L) No. 3094 of 2012 -- M/s Dalmia Cement (Bharat) Limited, company incorporated under the provisions of companies Act, 1956 represented through Mr. Manoj Kumar, Assistant Manager, Legal having its registered office at 2 & 3 Dr. Rajendra Prasad Sarani, Kolkata-700001 (West Bengal) and local office at 6th floor, Nutan Plaza, Bandar Bagicha, Patna, Bihar .. Petitioner Versus 1. Sri Bhagwan Singh, son of Shiv Shankar Dayal Singh, Resident of Village and P.O: Pachpakhri, District Rohtas. 2. Sri Sashi Bhushan Sharma, S/o Not Known, Resident of: House of: Ramchandar Dushadh, At & Post: Banjari, District: Rohtas, State: Bihar 3. Union of India through Ministry of Labour, Rafi Marg, New Delhi. ..Respondents -- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN -- For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sachin Kumar, Advocate Miss. Aditi Raj, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Abhay Kr. Mishra, Advocate -- 23/03.02.2026 Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. The instant writ petition has been preferred by the petitioner against the Award dated 06.03.2009 passed by Central Government Industrial Tribunal No. 1, Dhanbad in Reference No. 68 of 2009. 3. Mr. Sachin Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner-Company submits that the erstwhile Company, Kalyanpur Cement Ltd. went to NCLT under the scheme of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (in short “I.B.C 2016”) and thereafter NCLT has approved the resolution plan with regard to erstwhile company and finally the present petitioner, which is M/s Dalmia Cement (Bharat) Limited has been given the said company after the proper procedure and Rules of I.B.C. 2016. 2026:JHHC:2836 2 4. At this stage itself, it is necessary to observe that whenever the new company takes over after a proper resolution, it takes the company without any liability, except the resolution plan and there is no dispute that NCLT has proceeded before passing the Award and since M/s Dalmia Cement (Bharat) Limited, has taken over the erstwhile company as per the resolution plan approved by the NCLT, Delhi; now this court is having no jurisdiction to interfere with that resolution plan and in that view of the matter, no order is required to be passed with regard to Award. 5. It goes without saying that if at all in the resolution proposal, the workmen would be party; then, certainly they would have got some benefits. However, as stated hereinabove, after the resolution plan approved by the NCLT as per I.B.C, 2016, this Court cannot go into the merits of the case with regard to the Award. In other words, after the approval of the Resolution plan by the NCLT; neither there would be any liability of erstwhile company, namely, Kalyanpur Cement Ltd., nor there will be any liability for new company i.e., M/s Dalmia Cement (Bharat) Limited, and everything will be guided by the Resolution plan which was approved by the NCLT. 6. In this regard, reference may be made to the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of 2026:JHHC:2836 3 Ghanashyam Mishra & Sons (P) Ltd. v. Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction Co. Ltd. 1 wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that plan becomes binding on the corporate debtor, its employees, members, creditors, guarantors and other stakeholders involved in the resolution plan. The legislative intent behind this is to freeze all the claims so that the resolution applicant starts on a “Clean Slate” and is not flung with any surprise claims. If that is permitted, the very calculations on the basis of which the resolution applicant submits its plans would go haywire and the plan would be unworkable. For brevity para-93 of the aforesaid judgment is quoted hereinbelow: “93. As discussed hereinabove, one of the principal objects of the I&B Code is providing for revival of the corporate debtor and to make it a going concern. The I&B Code is a complete Code in itself. Upon admission of petition under Section 7 there are various important duties and functions entrusted to RP and CoC. RP is required to issue a publication inviting claims from all the stakeholders. He is required to collate the said information and submit necessary details in the information memorandum. The resolution applicants submit their plans on the basis of the details provided in the information memorandum. The resolution plans undergo deep scrutiny by RP as well as CoC. In the negotiations that may be held between CoC and the resolution applicant, various modifications may be made so as to ensure that while paying part of the dues of financial creditors as well as operational creditors and other stakeholders, the corporate debtor is revived and is made an on-going concern. After CoC approves the plan, the adjudicating authority is required to arrive at a subjective satisfaction that the plan conforms to the requirements as are provided in sub-section (2) of Section 30 of the I&B Code. Only thereafter, the adjudicating authority can grant its approval to the plan. It is at this stage that the plan becomes binding on the corporate debtor, its employees, members, creditors, guarantors and other stakeholders involved in the resolution plan. The legislative 1(2021) 9 SCC 657, 2026:JHHC:2836 4 intent behind this is to freeze all the claims so that the resolution applicant starts on a clean slate and is not flung with any surprise claims. If that is permitted, the very calculations on the basis of which the resolution applicant submits its plans would go haywire and the plan would be unworkable. 7. Having regards to the aforesaid discussions, the Award dated 06.03.2009 passed by Central Government Industrial Tribunal No. 1, Dhanbad in Reference No. 68 of 2009, becomes infructuous; and the instant application stands disposed of. (Deepak Roshan, J.) 3rd February, 2026 Jk Uploaded on 14/03/2026 AFR